> What you say here is true, but if the original software is OSD-compliant, then
> the patent license(s) for the original software need also be freely available
> to non-conforming applications. OSD #3 states: "The license must allow
> modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under
> the same terms as the license of the original software."
One might read OSD #3 narrowly as only speaking to copyright rights,
not patent rights. Is it commonly understood to encompass both?
If the open source license itself contains no patent license at all,
how is OSD #3 violated by the existence or non-existence of external
patent licenses of any form, when OSD #3 only references the open
source license itself?
- Bob [perhaps foolishly seeking OSD enlightenment]